Good morning, everyone.

I'd like to call the Washoe County Board of Adjustment January 526 meeting to order.

May we please have a determination of quorum?

Peter Gashon.

Present.

Rob Pierce.

Present.

Kathy Julian.

Present.

Patrick Caldwell.

Present.

Leo Harishni.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Thank you.

Uh if you would all please stand and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Under God.

All right.

Mr.

Lehman, please have the ethics law announcement.

Board members are reminded that if with respect to any matter or any person coming before the board today, that one, you have received a gift or loan, two, you have a pecuniary interest.

Three, you have a commitment in a private capacity, such as a family and family employment, business, or other similar relationship, or four, you provided representation or counseling before an agency to a person or entity for compensation within the last year on a matter being considered.

Board members are also reminded that under the Board of Adjustment Rules, if you had any contact outside this meeting with persons interested in a matter coming before the board today, you should disclose the nature of that contact at this meeting.

Zoom instructions.

To attend this meeting via Zoom, please log into the Zoom webinar link or webinar using the link found on the agenda.

You can also join the meeting by typing in Zoom.us into your computer browser, clicking join a meeting on the Zoom website and entering this meeting ID.

872 1567 5749.

Alternatively, you can join the meeting via telephone only by dialing 1669-900-9128, entering the meeting ID 872-15675749 and pressing pound.

For those wishing to provide public comment via Zoom, log into Zoom webinar using the link on the agenda and utilize the raise hand feature during any public comment period to provide public comment comment via telephone via telephone only.

Press star nine to raise hand and star six to mute slash unmute.

Thank you.

Mr.

Lloyd, the appeal procedure, please.

Most decisions rendered by the Board of Adjustment are appealable to the Board of County Commissioners.

If you disagree with the decision of the Board of Adjustment and qualify as an agreed person or party, you may appeal in writing within 10 calendar days from the date that the decision be an appeal is reduced to writing, filed with the Secretary of the Board of Adjustment and mailed to the original applicant in the proceeding being appealed in accordance with Washoe County Code.

Please call the planning staff immediately at 775-328-6100 for information on the appeal procedure and the application fee.

Thank you.

There is no public comment via Zoom or in chambers.

Okay, and uh has everyone reviewed today's agenda?

Any comments, questions, changes?

I'll entertain a motion.

This is Rob.

I move to accept as written.

This is Pat Caldwell second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

All those in favor of approving the January 5th, 2026 agenda, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say nay.

Okay, motion passes.

Has everyone uh reviewed the December 4, 2025 draft minutes.

Any comments, changes, questions?

No.

This is Rob, I move to accept as written.

This is Pack Caldwell, I second.

Okay, we have a motion and a second to uh approve the December 4, 2025 draft minutes.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say nay.

Okay, motion passes.

All right, let's move on to the public hearing.

Item 8A, special use permit case number WSUP 25-0020, lakeshore grading.

Mr.

Lloyd, would you please announce?

Yeah, for hearing discussion and possible action to approve a special use permit to allow for a driveway to traverse a slope of 30% or greater and to construct a permanent firm earth uh permanent firm greater than four and a half feet in height within the required front yard setback.

The applicant is proposing finished slopes of one horizontal to one vertical.

Representing Washoe County in this matter is planner Jolene Bertetto.

Thank you.

Everything's moving a little slowly today.

Is it a stage stop sharing?

Sorry, we're going to just add it up.

Okay.

Sorry, Joan.

Jolene Bertetto, Washoe County Planning.

Today we are looking at special use permit application, WSUP 250020 for 449 Lakeshore grading.

And starting off with a little bit of background, this applicant did apply for a special use permit in February 2021, it was approved.

And then again in May 2023, which was also approved.

So the current proposal that you're looking at is identical to those past proposals.

It is for grading that would allow for the development of a driveway and single family residence.

And the applicant did share that the delay was due to funding, some of that resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.

That's why those last special use permits expired.

But they are confident that if this one is again approved, they would have those funding issues taken care of and would be able to proceed with the project.

This is part of the Tahoe area plan, specifically the Tahoe Crystal Bay area.

It's 1.32 acres in size.

You can see that it is lakeside, and it's located right off of State Route 28.

So this parcel does have steep slopes that are requiring that major grading permit that we're looking at today.

So their grading triggers two requirements for the special use permit.

They're up here on the board.

And then the second is grading to construct a berm greater than four and a half feet within the required front yard setback.

And when this applicant had applied for those previous special use permits, there were additional major grading triggers, but our grading code has been revised over the last couple of years.

But these two still are uh requirements.

And here's a look at the site plan.

The site plan is pretty detailed, so this is just a screenshot that I grabbed from it to show to you today.

Um the main house, as you can see on here, up to state route 28, um, is more than 50 feet, and it does exceed 30% slope and areas.

And then on this plan, there's a dotted line that shows the parcel property line.

So anything in the circle here on the right, where the end of the driveway is meeting state route 28, that is going to be regulated by N DOT.

That is part of the N dot right-of-way.

And so they will need an encroachment permit.

I did want to point out that in the area plan when I was evaluating it.

Um, there is a area, a part of it that says further encroachment permits onto highway 28 should be discouraged.

Um so with that in mind, we did circulate this application to NDOT, and they will require that encroachment permit and occupancy permit.

Um the applicant wanted to note, and they had this in the application that previously n dot did approve those permits, but as of right now, those permits are in progress.

The applicant shared they met with NDOT in person in November, and that there's a few exhibit items that they're updating.

Um, that is pending.

Um so that information from NDOT is not available at this time.

In addition to NDOT, it was circulated to um, or including NDOT, it was circulated to 24 other agencies for review.

So we do have conditions by NDOT, um, Washoe County Traffic, the County Sheriff's Office, and the County Engineering Department.

A neighborhood meeting was not required because this is a residential grading project, but a notice was sent to 37 unique property owners within a 1200 foot radius, as seen on the map on the right.

Um we did receive five public comments that were in opposition to the project, voicing concerns around dangerous conditions uh from State Route 28, and then concerns around erosion, sediment, and eyesore issues in the event that the parcel uh the project was started and then abandoned on the parcel.

I did want to share, addressing some of those public comments that the applicant did provide this diagram for slope stabilization.

Their proposal will utilize a combination of walls, revegetation to stabilize the slopes, and that includes rockery walls, concrete walls, native revegetation, and erosion mats.

So even though this is a steep slope and requires that encroachment permit from NDOT, we were able to make the following five findings that the applicant is proposing best practices for grading to accommodate a legal buildable lot, and grading will also need to meet TRPA standards for consistency.

So that TRPA permit is also being updated and is under review.

Um finding around improvements, there's adequate utilities and public facilities.

Um the site, again, while steep has been found to be suitable for grading for a driveway and single family residence.

Um we found that all potential impacts will be properly mitigated, and then there is no um detrimental effect on a military installation.

So we are recommending approval with conditions and provide uh a possible motion to approve as seen up here on the board.

And not sure what's happening there on the screen right now, but um that concludes the presentation and um I'm available for questions.

The applicant is also joining us um online on Zoom.

Okay, uh this is Peter for the record.

Can you just go back to the notice map?

I'm pretty sure that was wrong.

And can you just confirm for us that how many properties were noticed?

Sure.

Um if we can get that back up.

Oh screen on my thing's moving slowly.

Let me look at my presentation.

Okay, so the notice map.

Oh gosh, you're right.

I included a different screenshot of the notice map.

I'm looking at it on my um my computer.

Yeah.

Looks like not Tao.

No, that is not Tahoe.

Um that was a different.

It appears to be Spanish Springs in the industrial park.

Yeah.

Um apologies there.

That is a holdover from obviously the template.

But is the text correctly?

Text is correct.

Okay.

Yes.

Okay.

That's kind of embarrassing.

I'm sorry about that.

No, no, I just boarded.

Um, the text is correct in the noticing and then um the public comments.

Okay.

Does anybody have any questions for staff at this time?

This pack hold for the record.

I had one question about um, I understand the driveway's going to be 14 feet wide, and then towards highway 28, it's how wide for turnarounds and because in the in here it says that the applicant shall design the driveway entrance to accommodate all turnaround movements without requiring a three-point turn to access the driveway.

How wide is that driveway at its access point there?

I couldn't find it on here, or it's too small for my old eyes.

Let's see.

The coin secretary Adriana Angeline, we do have the applicant, Joshua Myers on, if you like to.

Sure.

Um, I'm looking to see if I have that information readily available.

Um they do mention that they will be widening it at the north to allow for vehicle turning movements.

They do mention that they will be widening at the north to allow for vehicle turning movements.

I do not have the information on how wide that will be in the N DOT right away.

They will have to submit those final driveway plans when they're getting their encroachment permit.

Kathy Julian for the record.

Yeah.

I also have a query along those same lines.

But my confusion is that in the application, it does say that they have received approval for some of the N DOT approvals.

And you I believe just said that there had been an encroachment approval that had been approved before.

Well, wouldn't the design of the driveway as well as the site distance standards and the traffic control plan, which I also have an interest in understanding that, wouldn't they have been approved, approved as part of those previous N DOT approvals?

And do we have access to that information now?

I believe those have expired, so we are looking.

I did want to bring up the background of this project that some of you may have reviewed those original special use permits, but that we are looking at it as a new special use permit, and so that information was not provided.

Trevor, did you want to add anything?

Or we could also ask the applicant if they want to provide more details along those lines.

Yeah.

I I don't know that I'm certainly not prepared to provide details on the previous approvals.

Uh what I can state is that this is a new project requiring new uh new permitting.

Uh we there is a condition, a requirement uh for a new occupancy permit uh that needs to be obtained through N DOT.

So they may take that, N DOT may take that into consideration, but that is a requirement of this special use permit.

So my understanding Kathy Julian, for the record, so my understanding is that we may be asked to approve this without having information about the design of the entry and about the site analysis and about the traffic control, which were all things that the community had raised as concerns.

So we would be approving it for the grading portion of it, and when they do come back to us with a building permit, um the driveway would be under more scrutiny at that time.

Okay, and on the grading portion of it, am I to understand that the grading is not only for the driveway but for the pad that the building will be based built on?

Um yes, correct.

Um the driveway traversing that steep slope was one of the major grading special use permit triggers.

Um but yes, this is looking at grading for the entire um parcel.

If I can also weigh in to respond to uh to your question, what what you're looking at is a is approval of a plan, uh essentially a conceptual plan with the understanding that there may be uh minor modifications needed in order to comply with the requirements of Washoe County of NDOT of the reviewing agencies and to make the the engineering work.

Uh so what we as as staff will require of the applicants is that their plans are in substantial conformance uh with the approved plans, with the understanding that there could be slight modifications.

Uh this pack holder for the record.

Okay, so if this is treated as a new SUP as you know, compared to the other two that were submitted that were expired.

The one thing that I do don't understand is that in the application, the applicant says the project was designed to Washoe County TRPA and N DOT standards, TRPA and N DOT approval has already been granted.

So is that a true statement?

Or are they referring to the previous SUPs?

They are referring to the previous SUPs, those um N DOT permit process.

Those are all being renewed because their plan didn't change from that previous one.

I think that's why they chose to include that.

Um but when I spoke with the applicant, they said those permits are actually pending.

That's why those were not provided to the board prior to this meeting.

Okay.

Kathy Join for the record.

May I have uh some clarification though?

Three of the things I think they needed to get that previous N DOT approval was the site distance uh plan, the or standards analyses, the um driveway design and the traffic control um information.

My understanding though is if that's already been done for the previous application, but it's not public information, so that the community raising concerns about those three aspects wouldn't necessarily have uh access to that is public information, so they're operating in the dark.

Can I pull us back to what the request is at hand here?

Uh with the understanding that any permits along uh state route uh 28 would require similar um approvals through end dot any encroachment permit without going through a a public hearing process.

So what we're looking at is the proposed grading um of the driveway on on site.

Um I don't know that we have are uh maybe we have engineering staff here and can better uh address the the requirements of end dot, but I don't know that we are prepared to to respond to all of the the specifics that uh that endot will be looking at with the uh the the permit in place.

Well, and this is Peter, can I follow on that before uh we hear from engineering?

There's a statement that says Washoe County does not have regulatory jurisdiction over the right-of-way.

So even if there were a traffic control plan that we didn't agree with, it doesn't matter because we have no regulatory control over the right-of-way.

Is that a fair statement?

Janelle Thomas, senior licensed engineer for the record.

Um, yes, uh member Gishon, that is correct.

That is an accurate statement.

That um one of the conditions of approval that engineering has recommended for this uh SUP application is the um applicants' ability to attain that uh encroachment and occupancy permit from N DOT.

They do have jurisdiction over their um roadway, and they would be the ones that would approve any kind of traffic control uh plans or construction plans um that interfere or encroach into their right-of-way.

Does that provide additional clarity for you, member Julian?

Um well clarification though.

The if they were does the grading of the pad where the house will be also trigger any um SUP requirement or not, or it's simply the grading of the driveway that triggers the SUP requirement.

It is the overall amount of grading that is triggering this, I believe.

And I will try not to plan a slope.

Slope, right?

Um I'll just add in previous special use permits, it was based on the amount of grading, but our grading code has been revised.

So we're specifically um when we're looking at the special use permit, looking at the slope of the driveway.

Yeah, I guess the question I'll paraphrase is whether or not the berm uh uh exceeds four and a half feet to fill this uh four and a half feet of slope in order to fill the pad site for the the house.

I don't know the answer to that question if it's just for the driveway or does it also include the pad for the house?

No.

I believe that's up near the driveway.

But just the driveway because it's in the um the CEPAX Ms.

Uh Leo Horushini, I don't know if this will help or make things worse, but on page six, it uh the top of the paragraph does say the grading uh will occur primarily for the construction of the driveway building pad and retaining walls.

So that sounds like that sounds like that would include the house pad.

Do we know if the applicant has a presentation or would they like to speak now?

The applicant, I believe, is available.

I see the initials JGM if that is Joshua Myers, or you're with the applicant.

Please unmute and state your first and last name for the record.

Uh Joshua Myers.

The floor is yours.

So I'm the applicant.

Uh a lot of good questions you guys are asking.

The project uh I met with N DOT in November.

Uh nothing is changing at all from the original submittal.

Uh we've already submitted uh a traffic plan to end out that required just an update on it.

Uh nothing's changing on the plan.

They just want it updated with a current date.

Um we've actually done a three-point turn radius uh exhibit that the engineers did uh showing that a fire truck primarily it was for fire.

Um we've actually done a three-point turn radius uh exhibit that the engineers did uh showing that a fire truck primarily it was for fire, the fire truck can come in there and make a three-point turn uh within the initial entrance off of highway 28.

You were asking how wide it was.

Um I don't know exactly how wide it is, but it was designed to accommodate a three-point turn for a fire truck.

Um that was the reason for doing it.

Um so yeah, a lot of the a lot of the the questions that I hear you guys asking, um, you know, N DOT has those exhibits, those exhibits have already been done, they were done with the previous submittal.

Um is essentially you know, assured me that they're reapproving it, pending just updating a few reports.

Uh also met with Paul Nielsen TRPA, nothing is changing.

Um they just want me to fill out the application, they're reapproving it.

So all the questions that you guys are asking, all the reports have been done and and you know, filed with the proper agencies being TRPA and NDOT.

So and the grading, the grading that we're looking at is primarily for the driveway.

Um it it obviously the the home is being built uh with retaining walls and fill.

So the grading is not as dramatic for the pad as it is for the driveway.

The driveway has a uh front slope facing the the lake that's 16 feet tall, that obviously has all been you know engineered already and approved by you know, previously approved by NDOT engineering, so it meets all code.

Um if you have any specific questions, I'd be happy to answer.

Uh yeah, this is Pat Coldwell for the record.

Um I have one question regarding um the actual turnaround area.

Um what will prevent people from using that as a turnout or turning around themselves?

Uh I worry somewhat about the traffic issue there and uh you know potential hazards.

Are there going to be signs or how is that going to be handled?

Yeah, I mean, obviously there could there's probably be a do not enter sign, but there it is gated.

So that the project is gated uh at the highway.

Um so people won't be able to drive down the driveway.

Um, but you know, it is it is open, it's an open, it's open as as is all the other driveways.

You know, all the other driveways on highway 28 are open.

It is it is open, it's uh you know the portion where you know it goes off the highway, but it's gated as you go down to the house.

Okay, thank you.

Kathy Julian for the record.

Um thank you.

If if you can elaborate on that turnaround a bit more, I'm reading a condition in here saying that the applicant shall design the driveway instant entrance to accommodate all turning movements without requiring a three-point turn.

But it sounds as though the approval from NDOT was for a fire engine that would require doing a three-point turn.

Correct, because they want to turn the fire engine around.

I okay.

My assumption this was discussing the concept of turning into the driveway without obstructing traffic in the road.

Um I misunderstanding something here.

Janelle Thomas, for the record.

Um the intent of the uh condition that was provided by engineering um is to prevent vehicles from approaching the gate to the to the property and not being able to turn around.

And so we the last thing that we want to occur is for um general traffic to be performing backing into that right-of-way of highway 28.

And so the intent of our condition was that we would prevent any kind of backing into highway 28.

And that it doesn't sound like that's what's been presented to NDOT.

Now they have jurisdiction over what traffic maneuvers can occur um on their right-of-way, but um I would say that the the primary intent is to eliminate um vehicles from backing into highway 28 when they reach that gate.

I'm sorry, Kathy Julian, for the record, just to clarify, and backing into Highway 28 would occur if the turn were too sharp.

Yes to, and you would need to accomplish a three-point turn to get into the driveway.

Okay.

So I have so I have some confusion now as to what NDOT has possibly approved versus what you're requiring here.

So that that's just I'll put that on the table.

But if I can go back to what the applicant said, my understanding was that the I thought the gate was going to be further down from the road because there was some reference to four carbs being able to stack so that there wouldn't be backup into the highway.

Four cars.

Perhaps the applicant can address that.

Yes, the uh the gate is offset.

It is offset slightly down the driveway.

Um don't have the plans in front of me, but you know, to my memory, I think it's you know 15, 20 feet down the driveway.

You know, but it's it's it's visible.

The gate is visible from the highway.

You'll be able to visibly see it from the highway.

But it's not it's not on highway 28, it's on the driveway portion as it goes down.

I think the plan showed if you can you can pull the driveway plans up again that you had on the screen before that I showed if you have the you can actually see the columns for the gates, they should be on that uh they should be on that diagram that showed the house.

Okay, okay, great.

Because one of the statements made seemed like the gate was going to be on highway 28, and I wanted to clarify that.

Um can Kathy Julian for the record, um, would the um applicant be able to elaborate at all about the site distance analysis that was done and presented to NDOT and also the um the traffic control plan, just what what that might entail to my knowledge the site analysis plan was done by the engineer for NDOT.

It was approved by NDOT.

To my knowledge, the the site analysis plan has certain criteria for visit visibility that your site has to meet to be considered for the criteria even to have access off of highway 28.

Yeah, I saw the you can see the gates right here when you look um when you look on the diagram here, you can see the gates.

It looks like they're well, maybe they're a little bit further down.

They're uh right.

Uh keep going to your left.

Uh to uh come back up the driveway.

Come back up.

Stop, stop right there.

You're you're right, you're directly on the gate right now.

Can actually see the little flanges there that we drew, so you can see the opening right there.

That's it, correct.

Anything else from anybody?

Uh yeah, this is Pat Holdo for the record.

I have one more question.

Um since the SUP was approved twice.

What is the expected time period that uh you'll be able to complete this project?

So we anticipate starting uh May 1st, and we will get the grading, the grading will be finished.

The grading will be finished uh in 2026.

Okay, thank you.

We have about yeah, yeah, that's right.

My Kathy Julian Were you talking about the grading or the the house.

This is Pat Caldwell for the record.

I was talking about the grading.

Yes.

Yeah, that yeah, this year, 2026.

Okay.

What are you said, Kathy?

Uh Kathy Julian for the record.

I still was um so you have no further information about the traffic control plan, what was suggested?

Because uh there was a um uh letter from the Washoe County Sheriff Office that commented about um, and again, I'm focusing on this because the community is focused on this.

Um at least the people who responded to the letter.

The um uh Washoe County Sheriff's Department uh office said that they hadn't received um they hadn't, I think reviewed the uh traffic control plan.

Um and I was wondering, but they did mention that they anticipated there would be stoppages on Highway 28, and they would of course want to be notified of such stoppages.

So that leads me to wonder what kind of traffic control plan has been in the past approved by NDOT, which will be uh again reviewed, updated, and approved, but again without public knowledge, because those things are done without public review.

So um it I would like to understand what that traffic control plan looks like.

Great.

That's a great question.

So the traffic control plan that we have designed for this project essentially has two people at all times with radios, as I don't know if ever any of you guys have ever driven down highway 28 before up in Lake Tahoe, but essentially you have a uh you know, a guy with a vest on, orange vest, he's got a radio and a stop sign, and they coordinate to stop traffic in one direction uh when needed, and to you know, reverse and open traffic in the other direction.

As far as the scheduling, the scheduling is concerned, you know, that that is something that they gave they they gave us hours in which we can do our traffic control.

We have to they have a schedule for us to follow up there.

I I don't have the schedule in front of me, but I recall it was a schedule.

But no, essentially it's a you know, it's a professionally managed uh traffic control plan that is controlled by a company that you actually hire to do the traffic control.

So it's there's companies out there that do the traffic control.

So it's a it's a coordinated controlled effort, you know, to stop the traffic when it needs to be stopped and move the traffic when it needs to be moved.

And that only the traffic control, then remember that the traffic control is only used when we need to work on the highway, uh, when we need to, you know bring equipment in that that that can't um you know get down the driveway.

I mean, obviously once the once the initial once the initial part of the driveway portion off of highway 28 is built, and once half of the driveway is built down to the residents, we won't have traffic control anymore.

That'll you know, we we only need traffic control to get the cut in the guardrail and to build a retaining wall and to have the ability to get on to the site.

Once we get on to the site, we won't need traffic control.

So I anticipate we'll probably have probably May, June, July, end of July with traffic control.

So if I two three two, three months of traffic control, that helps you.

Okay, thank you very much.

Okay, let's uh just Jolene Bertet uh for the record.

Um to address the question from their previous permit with N DOT, just the hours of operation, though again, I did not present this to the board because it is not going to be valid until another one is signed.

Um but just um to help with your decision, the hours of work were limited to 7 a.m.

to 3:30 p.m.

Monday through Friday to avoid that weekend traffic.

Okay, thanks.

Um we have any public comment.

There is no public comment in chambers and on Zoom.

There are no hands raised.

Okay, let's bring it back to the board for discussion.

Anybody have any immediate thoughts?

Kathy Julian for the record.

Um of the concerns raised by the people who responded was, and I know this because living in Incline Village, I go by there frequently.

Um there is a property right next door that began an excavation um grading process and and had and stopped for some reason, and I have no idea why.

Has um but that issue is what happens if there is a stoppage here for some reason, and and I understand that piece of property next door is for sale again.

Um so evidently there was uh a serious problem with that.

What do we have any?

I think one of the uh community members mentioned is there any bonding that can be done to ensure that there are monies to repair the property if if it's not if it for some reason cannot proceed or to mitigate environmental damage from whatever has been done.

And I'm just curious if the county has looked at this or has even considered the property next door had serious problems, I believe, given that it's the operations are abandoned now and it's for sale.

So has that factored into any analysis?

Janelle Thomas for the record.

Um I don't have the history on the adjacent properties, but I know that this would be processed in the same manner or a similar manner in that we would review that uh grading permit application, typically unless they are disturbing over an acre of land.

Um we don't require a specific um bond for grading.

Um but yeah, I they would have to follow the rules and regulations as set forth in their grading permit.

So Kathy Julian for the record, so would I assume that it would probably fall to perhaps TRPA to be the body addressing the um the implications of a failed project on the lake in terms of I would guess that that is runoff and so forth.

Correct.

Okay.

Right.

I yeah, and I I know that TRPA has some some teeth in their regulations.

This does require uh a parallel path.

Um it does require approval through both Washer County and TRPA.

Uh however, I I'm not at uh at liberty right now.

I don't know the answer to the question in terms of whether they require bonding.

I I don't know that they do or not, but uh they have some very stringent regulations that I believe they're imposing on the neighbors right now.

Uh this pack holder for the record.

Um yeah, Kathy, it's one of the things that actually I consider too in the public comment.

And I I think for the right-of-way and traffic, we have to really rely on N DOT standards and and what they're gonna require.

And where I'm sympathetic to the public commenters that you know, the property next door, they didn't complete it and the land was scarred and everything, I I don't think really we can penalize this homeowner because of some other homeowner, and that's kind of my thinking on it.

Is that it's it's not really fair.

Um Cathy Julian for the record.

I'm I'm not I I actually am not suggesting that one penalizes it, but I am I am cognizant that we are supposed to be suggesting mitigating actions, and so it does concern me that we we do look at what has gone before and and question that and ask if there is anything, but I understand there are limits for doing bond actions, and one would hope part of my questioning is to make sure the public in and anyone from the community listening to this or looking at the minutes understand what is available to the public to look at and what isn't available, the processes that are available to the public to look at and what isn't, and so that they know if there is a problem, they know where the problem is.

And um, so that's that's one thing that I always try to highlight here.

I'm I'm concerned as well, it's a very steep slope.

And the the five commenters aren't the only people in Incline Village who believe that these slope should not have been approved for building in any case, but that's not our purview here, so understood on that.

But in given the steepness of that and the difficulty, and given that these are choke points for evacuation in the summer for fire, that's why I probe on the traffic control aspect, because you will have backups on highway 28, and this could impact um fire evacuation in the summer.

Now, that being said, I'm I'm going to just make this as a a public state as a statement here of concern.

It always bothers me in these applications when we have the information from the fire department, the fire department, the North Lake Tahoe fire, that they never address, and they don't have the remit to address the issue of choke points and fire evacuation during construction.

And I would I would fervently hope that at some point down the road there will be some county requirement that someone looks at that in terms of uh some of these permitting processes and not simply can you get in or out of the of the facility as the fire department does now.

Um so I just want to go on record saying these are concerns that people in Incline Village have about building along this very sensitive, very steep section of highway.

Okay.

Thank you.

Leo, Robert If no further discussion, I'll entertain a motion.

This is Rob.

I move that after given recent consideration of information contained in the staff reported for information received during the public hearing in the Washoe County Board of Adjustments approved with conditions, special use permit case number WSUP 25-020 for Myers Family Trust with the conditions included in exhibit A to this matter, having made all five findings in accordance with Washoe County Code Section 110.810.30.

This is Pack Haldwell.

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed say nay.

Motion passes.

Thank you.

Okay, let's move on to item 8B, special use permit case number WSUP 25-0024, Dodge Flat Energy Storage.

Mr.

Lloyd.

Yeah, for uh hearing discussion and possible action to approve a special use permit for the establishment of a 150 megawatt battery energy storage system, which is classified as energy production renewable, uh, to be located adjacent to the existing Dodge Flat Solar Energy Center, and representing Washoe County in this matter is senior planner Courtney Waikey.

Thank you.

A little taller.

Okay.

One second.

Okay, good afternoon, Courtney Wakey, Senior Planner.

The item before you is uh special use permit case number WSUP 25-0024 for Dodge Flat Solar Battery Energy Storage System.

The project site is located west of the intersection of State Route 447 and Olinghouse Road, approximately 3.5 miles northeast of the town of Wadsworth.

The project area is located on four parcels totaling approximately 1,400 acres.

Surrounding parcels are either undeveloped or developed similarly with uh photo photovoltaic solar.

Uh the project is located in the Truckee Canyon planning area, and all parcels are zoned general rural.

And so the request before you is a proposal for a 150 megawatt battery energy storage system with associated ancillary uh facilities uh such as access roads, collection lines, etc., which is classified as a um energy production renewable use.

The project applicant is Dodge Flat Energy Storage LLC.

The project would connect to the existing substation at Dodge Flat Solar Energy Center.

Primary access to the site would be along Olling House Road from State Route 447, the same access used for the Dodge Flat Solar Energy Center.

The project would use existing right-of-way uh right of ways, which were authorized by the Bureau of Land Management.

34.5 KV collection lines, approximately 1.2 miles long, would be constructed from the battery storage facility to the existing Dodge Flat project uh substation.

The applicant is here and will be providing a broader overview of the need for the battery storage facility within the the vicinity.

The battery enclosures are similar in appearance to a cargo container, and a condition of approval requires the design compliance or requires design compliance with Washoe County code for cargo containers.

Specifically, we're looking at it being painted some sort of neutral color that blends in with the environment.

And my picture is not there, but I believe the applicant's presentation will give you a better idea of what those looks like.

Oh, this is related, sorry, to Article 410 parking, will not require routine permanent operational staff.

It is expected that there will be occasional maintenance with one to two employees visiting the site on an as-needed basis.

Since the existing Dodge Flat uh Solar Energy Center provides two parking spaces in front of the power generation facilities, one of which is an accessible space, and the proposed addition of the facility before you will not generate any new on-site employees beyond that of maintenance for the new use.

Staff does support waiving any of the additional parking requirements found in Article 410.

Okay, Article 412 for landscaping.

The applicant is also requesting a waiver from or to vary the standards found in Article 412.

The project as proposed does not uh provide for any formal landscaping.

Article 412.10D provides an exemption to the landscaping requirements for energy production renewable use types when located more than one mile from any residence, which that exempts this project for all landscaping requirements outside of those required for parking areas.

Staff is supportive of waiving those parking uh requirements for um or parking design standard improvements for the parking areas, and therefore is also supporting the applicant's request to waive the landscaping standards specifically for the required parking areas.

Additionally, the facility is located in an area with uh existing native vegetation and no available water for uh long-term irrigation.

Article 438 grading, approximately 8.1 acres of permanent disturbance and 17.9 acres of temporary disturbance will be necessary to complete construction of the project.

This includes up to 12,558 cubic yards of cut and 11,312 cubic yards of fill.

All the proposed grading complies with all portions of Article 438 grading.

The project application was sent to 22 agencies for review.

Four agencies uh provided conditions of approval, which are included as exhibit A to your staff report.

68 uh parcels were noticed for the uh today's hearing and uh at the initial uh application.

No public comments were received.

Staff does believe uh we are able to make all the required findings as detailed in the staff report.

The application is defined as a development of natural resources, and therefore additional findings are required per Article 810.35.

Staff has provided rationale for each of the uh of the appropriate findings above in the staff report as well.

And staff is recommending approval of the request, and have I have provided a possible motion for your consideration.

I'm available for any questions as well as the applicant, um, and they do have a formal presentation for you.

Okay, thank you.

Um I think I'd like to go ahead and hear the uh applicant's presentation at this time.

Please go.

Please state your name for the record.

My name is Brendan Hickey for the record.

This is for Dodge Flat Energy Storage.

Um I'm the project developer on behalf of Nexator Energy Resources as well as the applicant Dodge Flight Energy Storage.

On the line, we should have Matthew Smith, our environmental project manager, as well as Kamal Yosef Sai.

Um, he's our engineering construction project manager.

One alibi here, uh Michael Bettis is filling in for battery energy storage, fire and safety, um, and possibly online.

Angela Zang from Dudek and in the room with me is uh John Burkich.

Um next era.

So Next Air Energy is powered by two industry leading companies strengthened by a common platform.

One being uh Florida Power and Light, the largest electric utility in the United States, as well as Next Air Energy Resources, uh, which is a leading North American energy company.

We have over 74 gigawatts in operation between the two, and as you can see, all these various aspects of our energy portfolio down below.

Next area energy resources is uh, like I said, the country's energy infrastructure developer, and one area to note in this map uh that already exists in this Reno area.

We have a Fish Springs Ranch uh solar, which is operating, as well as as mentioned by Courtney, the Dodge Flat Energy Solar Facility that's also operating, both of which already have solar, and they also both have storage.

Um but overall, next era we have 38 gigawatts of generation of storage and operation, significant portion being wind, but we have a significant solar, and we are increasing in battery each day.

Um I'm not gonna continue on all those stats unless you want me to.

But as you can see, what I want to highlight is we're in every technology in almost every state.

Specifically for Nevada, uh we've been investing in Nevada since 2014.

In that approximately 2.7 billion in total infrastructure investments in the state.

Our subsidiaries, as similar to Dodge Flat Energy Storage, the applicant here.

Um we operate five solar sites for with energy storage facilities, totaling 820 megawatts across the state and 425 megawatts of energy storage.

And recently in 2022, we finished the Dodge Flat Solar Center that was already identified in operation.

Uh 4.8 million dollars we paid in 2024 in property taxes to Nevada communities.

1.2 million dollars annually in land payments to landowners, as well as we continuously do community benefits for our various areas where we have our projects.

Specifically for Dodge Flight Energy Storage, it is a 150 megawatt battery energy storage system.

Uh the access as identified earlier, only house road via state route 447.

One thing to note from our previous uh Dodge Flight Energy Storage, the Wadsworth Bypass Road is now open, so none of our traffic will need to go through Wadsworth.

It will just take the bypass route.

Um the GENTI for this project, we're not building a new GENTI.

We are simply using 1.5 uh mile new medium voltage collection lines to the existing facility substation.

And like I said, we'll be utilizing the operating projects Gen TI.

That's roughly about 300 feet into the NV Energy's only house substation.

Overall project schedule from start to finish about 18 months, but we're actually looking to do that much faster in approximately like 12 months or so.

Um peak construction will be about three months in total, and during that time that'd be about 200 workers per day traveling to the site.

Um and a significant amount of those will also carpool.

And we're targeting right now under contract with NV Energy summer 2027 operation date.

But as I said, we're trying to pull that in a little sooner.

We'll see how it works out.

Going into more specifics, this is a 150 megawatt nameplate capacity for a four-hour duration, so 600 total megawatt hours of grid charged battery battery battery energy storage, um, as identified, 25 miles northeast of Reno.

It's approximately 13 acres total on an 80-acre parcel.

Um it's owned by a privately owned uh Dodge Flat Energy Storage or sorry, energy center, which is one of our subsidiaries, and it's adjacent as identified with the solar operating project that was constructed and operated in operation since 2022.

Um with the we'll avoid over the facility's life, approximately 1.3 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions that would have been produced by electricity had been generated using fossil fuels as well.

And that for grading, the project roads uh and other components such as the substation and battery storage will include grading uh as Courtney identified the amount of grading.

Um grading is avoided when practically considering topography, drainage, geology, and other design engineering and construction needs.

As feasible, natural draining contours are left in place to maintain typical flows across sites.

This just makes sense for us because we would rather not fight Mother Nature.

Uh we've we have complied well with that, uh we will continue to do so.

And resource avoidance, the project is to is designed to avoid sensitive resources such as biological and archaeological archaeological resources if present, none have been present or found thus far.

And if they are found, these areas will be buffered to ensure no direct impact if needed.

On the water side, a municipal source will be used for water.

They'll be needed for construction, primarily for dust suppression, but water is typically not used during operation.

Uh, but if needed, a municipal source would supply water during operation.

This is our project schedule.

Right now we're here for the special use application uh hearing and as you can see continuing on through our commercial operation date in summer 2027.

And that concludes the presentation.

I welcome any questions.

Thank you.

Um science fiction.

That's good stuff.

Anyone have any questions?

Uh Leo Horishini for the record.

Uh I just am curious.

Does Dodge flat or does the larger energy entity do you control the um recycling and the end of end of life processing of the materials?

Because it was talking about how this is this project basically has a 30-year lifespan.

So I was just curious if your company also takes care of the batteries of their life.

Um we don't personally recycle them, but we do work with our diverse supply chain as well as there are entities out there that we've been working with and we align with that in the end of this project's life.

We will utilize what's available for those recycling chains for these batteries.

Does that answer your question?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Just yeah.

Anyone else?

Uh this is Pat Caldwell.

Pat Haldel for the record.

Um, you mentioned in your presentation that uh could power up to 57,000 homes.

What is the expected use for?

I can't speak to the specific use of this project.

We responded to an uh request for proposal from NV Energy.

They identified a short shortfall in capacity in specifically the summer of 2027 that we are targeting to bring this online to have capacity to meet their needs.

On a more detailed analysis, I would have to follow up with NV Energy to give you the specific what they're using the power for.

So it's not expected to be utilized on a USA parkway for those facilities out there or I cannot speak to that.

That is we are specifically contracting with NV Energy or Sierra Pacific Power and up here that they would have to answer any um they're the scheduling coordinator for this that they'll be dispatching the resource.

Okay, thank you.

This is Rob for the record.

I got one question.

57,000 KV.

How many data centers is that power?

One, maybe half a lot.

I I cannot speak to that on the data center side.

All right, thank you.

Anyone else?

Okay, thank you.

Um do we have any public funding?

I have no public comment via Zoom or in chambers.

Thank you.

Let's bring it back to the board.

Any uh discussion?

Okay, seeing that I'll entertain a motion.

This is Rob, I'll make it.

I move that after giving recent consideration information contained in the staff report and information received during a public hearing of the Washington County Board of Adjustments approved with conditional special use permit case number WSGP 25-0024 for the Dodge Flat Energy Center LLC with the conditions included in exhibit aid of this matter.

Have you made all five findings in accordance with Wash County Code Section 110.810.30, no additional development and natural resources findings in accordance with Washwood County Code Section 110, 810.35.

I further move to bury the development code standards for parking specified in Washoe County Code Section 110.410 and wave the industrial landscape standards for Washoe County Code Section 110.412.45.

Okay, thank you.

We have a motion.

Is there a second?

Julian could I second?

Okay, we have a motion and a second.

All those in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say nay.

Okay, motion passes.

All right.

Um moving on.

Any chair and war items, any future agenda items.

Don't we have a training or something coming up?

Yes.

Yes, we do.

I was gonna bring that up uh in my report.

But I can do that now.

Uh the training is next Thursday, that would be January um the 15th at uh 10 a.m.

So and this is really geared for new members.

Um it's a joint meet uh joint training with our planning commission as well.

Uh but again you don't have to be new.

You can this could be your second, third training if you if you'd like.

Um but yes, if uh we we we invite all of you to join us.

Um it'll be upstairs in the Mount Rose conference room uh in the uh the CSD uh department.

And might there be a zoom link?

Just in case.

There will be a zoom link, yes.

Okay, super gonna be sandwiches.

Yes, there will be sandwiches.

Thank you.

Who needs a zoom link?

We'd have sandwiches today.

Um okay.

Any requests for information from staff?

Anybody?

Okay.

Uh Trevor, any report on previous board of adjustment items?

Yes, I have one.

Uh and at the uh December 16th County Commission meeting, the uh county commission heard the appeal uh for the special use permit for the Sanctuary of God Church, and they affirmed the denial of the Board of Adjustment uh decision.

Wow, okay.

Any uh legal information or updates?

No updates for me at this time.

Thank you.

Okay, any uh public comment?

No public comment in chambers or via Zoom.

Okay, it is twelve oh five.

This meeting is adjourned.